After several years of rapid growth, the health care company became on

This question is based on Construction.

The conjunction ‘while’ doesn’t convey the contradiction in a strong enough manner in Option A. There is also a lack of parallelism because of the redundant pronoun ‘it’. The singular noun ‘payment’ doesn’t fit the meaning of the sentence that states that the company was months behind in making payments. The plural form ‘payments’ would be more appropriate. So, Option A can be eliminated.

Option B changes the construction and by using the verb form ‘fell’, converts the last part of the sentence into another clause, implying that that was another action performed by the health care company. The last part of the sentence is actually a description of how the company proved unable to handle the business. Option B also has the inappropriate conjunction ‘while’. So, Option B can be eliminated.

This option has the redundant pronoun ‘it’. Besides, the possessive pronoun ‘its’ in front of the participle ‘paying’ is awkward. So, Option C can be eliminated.

In Option D, the participle forms ‘proving’ and 'falling' make the sentence incomplete. So, Option D can also be eliminated.

Option E has the appropriate construction, with the verb ‘proved’ in parallel form to the verb ‘became’ in the non-underlined portion of the sentence. The conjunction ‘but’ is appropriate as it conveys the contradiction. The participle modifier at the end of the option describes how the company was unable to handle the business.
Therefore, E is the most appropriate option.

Jayanthi Kumar.

Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-

Meaning is crucial to solving this problem:
Understanding the intended meaning is key to solving this question; the intended core meaning is that the health care company became one of the largest health care providers in the metropolitan area, but then then the company proved unable to handle the increase in business, falling months behind in paying doctors and hospitals.

Concepts tested here: Meaning + Modifiers + Tenses + Idioms + Awkwardness/Redundancy

• “while” is used for actions that take place simultaneously.
• The simple past tense is used to refer to actions that concluded in the past.
• The introduction of the present participle ("verb+ing"- “falling” in this case) after comma generally leads to a cause-effect relationship.

A: This answer choice incorrectly uses "while" to refer to two actions that took place at different points in time; remember, “while” is used for actions that take place simultaneously. Further, Option A uses the needlessly wordy constructions "it then proved unable" and "in its payment to", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.

B: This answer choice alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "and fell months behind"; the construction of this phrase incorrectly implies that the company proved unable to handle the increase in business, and as a separate action fell months behind in paying doctors and hospitals; the intended meaning is that the company proved unable to handle the increase in business, and as a result fell months behind in paying doctors and hospitals. Further, Option B incorrectly uses "while" to refer to two actions that took place at different points in time; remember, “while” is used for actions that take place simultaneously. Additionally, Option B uses the needlessly wordy constructions "it then proved unable" and "in its payment to", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.

C: This answer choice uses the needlessly wordy constructions "it proved unable" and "in its paying", leading to awkwardness and redundancy; these constructions are redundant because "it" and "its" can be deleted without a loss of clarity.

D: This answer choice incorrectly uses the present participle ("verb+ing" - "proving" in this case) to refer to an action that concluded in the past; remember, the simple past tense is used to refer to actions that concluded in the past.

E: Correct. This answer choice uses the phrase "falling months behind", conveying the intended meaning - that the company proved unable to handle the increase in business, and as a result fell months behind in paying doctors and hospitals; remember, the introduction of the present participle ("verb+ing"- “falling” in this case) after comma generally leads to a cause-effect relationship. Further, Option E correctly uses the simple past tense verb "proved" to refer to an action that concluded in the past. Additionally, Option E avoids the idiomatic error seen in Options A and B, as it uses "but" rather than "while". Besides, Option E is free of any awkwardness or redundancy.

Hence, E is the best answer choice.

To understand the concept of "Comma Plus Present Participle for Cause-Effect Relationship" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~3 minutes):



To understand the concept of "Simple Tenses" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~2 minutes):



All the best!
Experts' Global Team

I like this question as it tests several concepts.
E.

The meaning suggests that we need contrasting "but", not "while" in the way it is used.
See below for other comments.

Here's how to ellipse:


After several years of rapid growth, the health care company became \(X(\)one of the largest health care providers in the Metropolitan area\()\), but then proved \(Y(\)unable to handle the increase in business, falling months behind in paying\()\)


company became X but (then) proved Y

falling... is a descriptive verb modifier, which the GMAT absolutely loves.

Final Answer, E.

OA is E

Here's how I went about it:

Step 1) While vs but then

I knew that the "healthcare company became one of the largest"---and then the part where it says "unable to handle the increase in business"---implies that the transition word we need is something that implies "however"

The idea is the company became really bit...BUT THEN...it couldn't handle being big.

So that's what I saw in (C), (D), and (E). I crossed off (A) and (B) for now.

Step 2) It proved Vs proving Vs proved.......
"Proving" in (D) doesn't make sense here. "but then proving unable to do blah blah blah, [something here]"
But that's not the sentence structure we see. So we know (D) is no good.

As far as "it proved" vs "proved in choices (C) and (E)---it's hard to say definitively so I keep reading the sentence.

Step 3) Looking closer at (C) and (E).
Then I notice they're trying to test me on "In its paying doctors" Vs "In paying doctors"

Well, "in its paying doctors" sounds kind of awkward. "In paying doctors" is much simpler and gets to the point

So there we have it--answer (E) but just doing a few simple thought processes the GMATPill way.

Hope that helps!

Hi,

The answer to me is 'E'.

In C you do not need the two extra 'it' and 'its' - There is only one subject in the sentence 'health care company' - as there is no potential for confusion you do not need to repeat it.

There would be more justification for the second 'its' if the word order was slightly different.

Currently:

'in its paying'

better would be

'in paying its'

This would be qualifying whose doctors are being paid, currently it is an awkward way of saying who is doing the paying

After several years of rapid growth, the health care company became one of the largest health care providers in the Metropolitan area, while it then proved unable to handle the increase in business, falling months behind in its payment to doctors and hospitals

(A) while it then proved unable to handle the increase in business, falling months behind in its payment to
(B) while it then proved unable to handle the increase in business and fell months behind in its payment to
(C) but then it proved unable to handle the increase in business, falling months behind in its paying
(D) but then proving unable to handle the increase in business, falling months behind in paying
(E) but then proved unable to handle the increase in business, falling months behind in paying


The official answer is E, as I saw on few threads discussing this question

somehow I don't understand how official answer can be E as clearly a comma and but indicate an independent clause (I presume there had not been any typos while posting and that comma is indeed out from the underlined part) then how can E be the answer as it clearly lacks subject....The answer must be C....I would like to have some expert opinion here if E really is the answer..or please if someone who has come across this question can clarify if the comma is in the underlined part

Dear ratinarace,

I'm happy to help with this. This question is about parallelism. The noun "the health care company" is the subject, and the best sentence has two verbs in parallel for this subject. This is exactly what (E) has:

.... the health care company became ......, but proved .....

Those two underlined verbs are in parallel. We don't need a pronoun before the second verb --- that actually makes the sentences longer and clunkier. The most concise and efficient sentence puts the two verbs directly in parallel.

Does this make sense?

Mike

Long compound sentences comprising two ICs that are connected by coordinating conjunctions such as and , or, but and so on ( there are seven of them called fanboys) generally use a comma before the conjunction; But this is skippable in short sentences

He hoped that he could get through his GMAT with over 700, but could hardly manage just 550
He wanted not tea but coffee
In the second case, we have not used any comma before but although the conjunction connects two independent nouns namely tea and coffee.
So connecting two ICS is only one of the functions of these fanboys, although they also connect other things as tow adverbs, verbs, adjective, adverbs, prepositional phrases etc
It may be also seen that in compound it is perfectly ok to skip the subject of the second IC in order to avoid redundancy, provided the subject of the first IC can also stand for the second IC.

After several years of rapid growth, the healthy care company became one of the largest health care providers in the metropolitan area, while it then proved unable to handle the increase in business, falling months behind in its payment to doctors and hospitals.

A. while it then proved unable to handle the increase in business, falling months behind in its payment to
B. while it then proved unable to handle the increase in business and fell months behind in its payment to
C. but then it proved unable to handle the increase in business, falling months behind in its paying
D. but then proving unable to handle the increase in business, falling months behind in paying
E. but then proved unable to handle the increase in business, falling months behind in paying

Correct ANS:
After several years of rapid growth, the healthy care company became one of the largest health care providers in the metropolitan area, but then proved unable to handle the increase in business, falling months behind in paying doctors and hospitals.

Analysis:
Independent clause 1:
"After several years of rapid growth" this is a prepositional phrase modifying "the healthy company"


"the healthy care company became one of the largest health care providers in the metropolitan area",

Independent clause 2:but then proved unable to handle the increase in business,

Verb-ing modifier modifying 2nd independent clause:falling months behind in paying doctors and hospitals.

My doubth is:For each independent clause there should be independent subject and verb.IC1 has got its own subject and verb "the healthy care company became"

But IC2 ,which starts with coordinating conjunction "but" is lacking of subject, it has only verb "Proved".
From the context, it is clear that the subject of the second IC is the health care company, if this is the case, my doubt is can a subject of one independent clause acts as the subject of another Independent clause?

Another point: "But" can act both as preposition and coordinating conjunction.
in this case, if this "But" is acting as a preposition or as a connector , then really the "comma" is required or not?

How can we know, whether " But" is using as coordinating conjunction or as a preposition?

Hi email2vm

First, just want to correct your thought of conjunction "but". Coordinating conjunctions connect NOT ONLY clauses, but also words, phrases.

In this question, yes, but should connect two clauses. However, we should not repeat the same subject to make a sentence concise.
For example: Peter is very smart but he is very lazy ==> we can rewrite the sentence: Peter is very smart but he is very lazy.

The idea is the same for E.

After several years of rapid growth, the health care company became one of the largest health care providers in the metropolitan area, but then the company proved unable to handle the increase in business, falling months behind in paying

Note: "falling months behind in paying" is verb-ing modifier + comma ==> modifies the preceding clause "bu then proved unable to handle the increase in business".

Hope it helps.

If the deconstruct the sentence, the core structure of the sentence is:

the health care company became....but then proved....

So, the parallelism is between became and proved (both are verbs). Basically, the health care company is the subject of the second clause as well.

Perhaps an easier example would help illustrate: Peter worked hard but did not perform well in the exam.

Peter is the subject of the second clause (did not perform well in the exam) as well.

Notice A, B and C unnecessarily repeat the subject by using the word “it”. “Became.. but…proved” in E is correct, rather than “became…but..proving” in D, as others have said. I didn’t like the singular “payment” in A and B. “Payments” sounds better to me. This problem is avoided in the correct answer, E. “But” emphasises the necessary contrast better than “while” does. “While” can sometimes be used as a word of contrast, but it can also be used to link two activities happening at the same time. The contrast is clearer in this sentence with the use of “but”.

I see two problems with (A). For starters, I can’t quite understand why “payment” is singular. If the health care company is “months behind”, wouldn’t that suggest that there are multiple payments – like, monthly payments, at the very least?

Second, I don’t think the conjunction “while” quite works here. “While” could mean either “at the same time as” or “although.” (Fun fact: until very recently, some grammar geeks insisted that “while” could NOT be used as a synonym for “although,” even though that usage has been a common part of spoken English for decades. Some grammar geeks need better things to worry about, I guess?)

This is really subtle, but it makes more sense to draw a sharp contrast using “but” instead of “although.” “Although” is a gentle qualifier that doesn’t invalidate the previous phrase; “but” is more direct, and suggests that the health care company’s status might be in doubt.

And even if you don't believe a word I said in the last two paragraphs, the singular “payment” is illogical enough to disqualify (A).


(B) has the same two problems as (A): “while” is suspect, and the singular “payment” is completely illogical. See above for more on those.

There’s also a subtle parallelism issue in (B). Consider two versions of the sentence:

• #1: “it then proved unable to handle the increase in business and fell months behind in its payments…”
• #2: “it then proved unable to handle the increase in business, falling months behind in its payments…”

Grammatically, both are fine. It’s just that in #1, the two verbs are parallel to each other, meaning that they’re “equally weighted” in some sense: the company did two things, and those two things do not necessarily depend on one another. In #2, “falling” is now a modifier, so it gives more information about the previous clause, “it then proved unable to handle the increase in business.”

And in this case, #2 – with “falling” as a modifier – makes much more sense in terms of meaning. The fact that the company fell behind in its payments helps us to understand how the company “proved unable to handle the increase in business.”

So we have plenty of reasons to eliminate (B), including the fact that we’re better off with “falling” as a modifier than as a verb.


(C) looks pretty good: “falling” is now a modifier (see part (B) above for more on that), and “payment” is no longer singular. But there’s a new problem: it doesn’t really make sense to use the possessive “its” in front of “paying.” In most cases, there’s no good reason why you would ever stick a possessive pronoun in front of an "-ing" word (for jargon fans: these are participles or gerunds, depending on the usage).

If you wanted to be conservative, you could hang onto (C), but we’ll have a better option below.

Let’s line (D) and (E) up side-by-side, since they’re so similar:

There’s only one difference between these two answer choices: the form of the word “to prove.” (D) gives us an “-ing” modifier (“proving”), and (E) gives us a simple past tense verb (“proved”).

(E) makes much more sense: “… the company became… but then proved unable…” Great, that’s nice and parallel, and it makes perfect sense to contrast two past tense verb phrases with each other. In (D), we have “… the company became one of the largest health care providers in the area, but then proving unable…” -- and I just can’t think of a good reason to use the conjunction “but” in front of an “-ing” modifier.

Given the choice between those last two options, (E) is clearly the best we can do.

After several years of rapid growth, the health care company became one of the largest health care providers in the metropolitan area, while it then proved unable to handle the increase in business, falling months behind in its payment to doctors and hospitals.

A. while it then proved unable to handle the increase in business, falling months behind in its payment to- While is used to show simultaneous actions and no simultaneous actions are taking place here. If we check the meaning closely, we will see that a contrast is what required because at first Company became largest health care then it did something contrary to this. We need a contrast word.

B. while it then proved unable to handle the increase in business and fell months behind in its payment to. Same as A.

C. but then it proved unable to handle the increase in business, falling months behind in its paying- Fixes the error by using "BUT", however in its paying sounds awkward.

D. but then proving unable to handle the increase in business, falling months behind in paying- But is also a parallelism marker. Here But should be followed by either verb (to be parallel to became) or a clause ( parallel to previous clause). The usage of proving here is incorrect. Also if we intend to check we can put the subject before proving. but then the health care company proving unable to handle the increase in business, falling months behind in paying. As we can see this is not even a complete sentence.

E. but then proved unable to handle the increase in business, falling months behind in paying- correct. But is followed by a verb. Now if we check, but then the health care company proved unable to handle the increase in business, falling months behind in paying. This is a proper sentence.

E seems correct but wouldn't the correct construction be: {DC,IC, but IC}? Without subject in second IC, this looks odd.

A. Grammatically correct but fails to show contrast.

B. Fails to show contrast and coordinating conjunction for cause and effect doesn't fit.

C. "in its paying" awkward construction.

D. "then proving" awkward construction.

Hello urvashis09,

I will glad to help you out with this one.


It is true that generally comma + and/but is used to join two independent clause. However, this is not the only usage of this connector. They are also used to join parallel elements in a parallel list. This is the function of comma + but we see in the correct answer choice.

Since the parallel entities are long phrases starting withe verbs, comma + but indicate the presence of the second parallel entity in the list. This is a valid structure and is employed in may official correct sentences.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
Shraddha